=

τοῖός τε, becomes a mere predicate, equivalent to δυνατός; for οἷός τε εἰμί δυνατός εἰμι = δύναμαι. Or, if τοιοῦτος, τοσοῦτος remains as the predicate, WoTe is substituted for olós re with either the finite verb or the infinitive, so that the relative becomes a mere adverbial adjunct, or secondary predicate. The apparent contradiction in these cases arises from the fact, that the pronouns TOLOÛTOS, TOσoûтos, &c., however apparently definite, are, as expressing a kind or class, and not individuals, really indefinite antecedents. So that, in fact, the participle without the article may express this sort of consecutive or illative sentence. For ἔχων = τοιοῦτος WOTE xe may be expressed in Latin by qui habeat or talis ut habeat, and we shall see that the prolepsis, or tertiary predicate in the oblique case, may approximate to this. And here the English language is liable to a confusion; for "who has" is used indifferently for qui habet and qui habeat: but this will not justify the teacher who allows his pupils to suppose that Greek syntax permits the same laxity.

SV. The Noun as Subject.

406 The substantive, which forms the subject of a proposition, is often used (a) with an extension of its meaning even in the singular, (B) with a limitation of its meaning in the plural, (y) with a change of application in either number, (8) in the genitive as part of a periphrasis.

(a) Singular for Plural.

(a) This is effected in regard to the names of animals by prefixing the feminine article; thus ππos signifies "cavalry," Herod. 1. 80; similarly káμnλos is "a troop of camels;" and " Boûs, "a herd of oxen" (above, 166, (5)).

(b) Without any change of gender names of materials may denote in the singular a collection of objects made from them; as ἄργυρος, χρυσός, χαλκός, “silver-, gold-, copper-utensils ;” κέραμος, "earthenware;" xápağ, "palisades," &c. Similarly ẻσ0ńs, “garments;" σтpoμvn, "bedding;" aμπeλos, "vines," &c.

(c) Ethnic names sometimes denote collective plurality; as o Пépons, ó Makedov, “the Persian or Macedonian army." Similarly ὁ πολέμιος, ὁ πέλας, “ our enemies, our neighbours.”

(d) The singular name of an implement may denote a collection of persons using it; as Sópu, "an army;" doπís, "a body of ἀσπίς, heavy-armed men;" κúπη, "a crew of rowers."

(e) In poetry inanimate objects often express plurality though the form is singular; thus kuua means "the sea;" dáκpv, "tears;" axTis, "the sun's light," &c. ἀκτίς,

(B) Plural for Singular.

Conversely, the plural is used where a single object is intended:

(a) When something plural is implied; thus yáμoɩ means "a marriage-feast," i. e. the festivities of a marriage prolonged through several days; rapal, "a funeral;" púπo, "filth," i. e. ῥύποι, a collection of filthy objects; πλOÛтο, "wealth," i. e. collected treasures; výktes, "night," i. e. the midnight hours. Hence names of feasts, as τὰ Διονύσια, τὰ Ἐλευσίνια, are in the plural.

(b) In the poets the plural is used to denote a single object; as γονεῖς καὶ τοκεῖς, of a father and mother; τὰ παιδεύματα, of a single child; và þíλτaτa, of a single relative; oi piñoɩ, of a single friend.

(c) In the first person the poets use or imply μeîs when yo is intended; as Eurip. Herc. F. 858: λov μapтupóμeσla Spŵσ' à δρᾶν οὐ βούλομαι; Id. Andr. 142: δεσποτῶν ἐμῶν φόβῳ ἡσυχίαν ἄγομεν; Id. Troad. 904: ὡς οὐ δικαίως, ἢν θάνω, θανούμεθα.

(d) Even proper names may be used in the plural to express persons of a particular class; thus, гopylaι Te Kai ÞiπTO, "persons like Gorgias or Philippus" (Aristoph. Av. 1701); ópŵv av Þaídpovs, ̓Αγάθωνας, Ερυξιμάχους, Παυσανίας, ̓Αριστοδήμους τε καὶ ̓ΑρισTоpávas, “when I see here a Phædrus, an Agathon, &c." (Plat. Sympos. p. 218 a).

(7) Change of application.

Either in the singular or plural the name of an object may denote the place where it is sold; thus ixûs and otov mean "the fish-market;" λáxava, "the vegetable-market;" σidnpos, "the iron-monger's shops;" eλalov," the oil-market;" μúpov, “the perfume-market." In Homer Oxos signifies "an assembly," and κάπρоs, or, as some write it in this case, koπρós, "a farm-yard."

(8) Periphrasis of the Subject.

Single objects, especially persons, are designated by the Greek poets and sometimes by the prose writers in a periphrasis with the genitive.

(a) The epic poets make the governing word fill the place of an epithet appropriated to the person; as μévos "Apnos, "the impetuous Ares;” ἱερὸν μένος ̓Αλκινόοιο, “ the divinely impetuous Alcinous;" iepnis Teλeμáxoro, “the divinely vigorous Telemachus;" σθένος Εκτορος, “ the strong Hector;" Πατροκλῆος λάσιον κῆρ, "the manly-hearted Patroclus."

(b) The tragic poets use a periphrasis with dépas, “body;" κάρα, "head or face;" oμμa, "eye;" to express characteristics or to strengthen endearments; thus, 'Ayaμéμvovos déμas, "the stately Agamemnon;” ὦ κοινὸν αὐτάδελφον Ισμήνης κάρα, " O my own dear sweet sister Ismene;” ὦ φίλτατ ̓ Αἴας, ὦ ξύναιμον ὄμμ ̓ ἐμοί, "O dearest Ajax, O sweet brother."

(c) Both in the poets and the prose writers the word xpîμa is used periphrastically to denote conspicuous magnitude; as ovos μéya xpñμa (Herod. 1. 36), "a great monster of a boar;" λéπтOV Tò Xpĥμa Távôpós (Aristoph. Vesp. 933), “the monster of a man is a thief."

(d) The poets combine two nearly synonymous words in a periphrase; thus, evvñs Xéktpov, "the bed's lair;” vnòs σkápos, "the ship's hull;" åpμáτwv oxoi, “the chariot's carriage;” μáxns ἀγών, ayov, "the fight's struggle," meaning really the object mentioned in the genitive.

(e) In speaking of persons we have sometimes a periphrase with the genitive; as vies 'Axauv, "sons of the Achæans;" waîdes Ἑλλήνων, “ children of the Hellenes;” or the word ἄνδρες used with the apposition or adjective; as ἄνδρες Αθηναῖοι, Athens;" avopes Sixaσral, "gentlemen of the jury."

§ VI. Apposition to the Subject.

men of

407 It is a general rule of grammar that nouns which belong to the same regimen are placed side by side (apponuntur) in the same case. This apposition, as it is called, is found equally in the subjects and in the predicates of sentences; and as it need only be discussed once for all, it may find its proper place here, especially as it more generally agrees in its nature with the epithet as dis tinguished from the predicate.

(a) There can be little doubt that the use of the article, which is the instrument of Greek syntax as distinguishing the subject from the predicate, may be traced back to an apposition of the name of the thing to the pronoun of reference. This, as we have seen (above, 389), appears clearly from such a passage as the following (Hom. Il. I. 11): οἵνεκα τὸν Χρύσην ἠτίμησ ̓ ἀρητῆρα, "because Atreides dishonoured him, the well-known person, namely, Chryses, being a priest;" where the position of apтñрa, without another article, makes it impossible to regard that word as the defining circumstance. The case is, in fact, the same as when we say in Attic Greek (Xen. Hier. VII. 3): TOUTų diaþépei ȧvýp Tŵv ἄλλων ζῴων, τῷ τιμῆς ὀρέγεσθαι, “ man differs from other animals in this, namely, in aiming at honour."

(3) In ordinary Greek the words in apposition may always be regarded as containing some explanatory addition, and it often happens that the parallel terms may be transposed without affecting the meaning. Thus in the phrase Κροῖσος, Λυδῶν βασιλεύς, ἀπέβαλε τὴν ἀρχήν, it is a matter of indifference whether we render it, “the king of the Lydians, namely, Croesus," or "Crœsus, being king of the Lydians.'

(7) The intimate connexion between the apposition and the epithet is shown by the cases in which the former is inserted between the noun and its article, so as to become, in effect, an epithet (above, 400, (8)). Thus in Plat. Symp. p. 196 c, â âv ékáv τις ἑκόντι ὁμολογήσῃ, φασὶν οἱ πόλεως βασιλῆς νόμοι δίκαια εἶναι, we might write, vóμoi, tóλews Baoiλns, “the laws, being the state's sovereigns," or construe it as it is, "the state's sovereigns, namely, the laws."

(8) Some difficulty is occasioned when this form of inserted apposition exhibits (a) an adjective, or (b) participle at the end. Thus,

(a) We have in Pind. Nem. VII. 53:

κόρον δ ̓ ἔχει

καὶ μέλι καὶ τὰ τέρπν ̓ ἄνθε ̓ ἀφροδίσια.

Here it is clear that appodíσia is not, like тeρπvá, an epithet of ἄνθεα, and the omission of the article before μέλι shows that τὰ Tερπvà ǎvoea constitute a parenthetical apposition to the last word:

"both honey and those sweet flowers, the joys of love, produce satiety." So also in Eurip. Bacch. 978,

ἀνοιστρήσατέ νιν

ἐπὶ τὸν ἐν γυναικομίμῳ στολᾷ

δόλιον Μαινάδων σκόπον λυσσώδη,

we must regard the last words as an explanatory apposition to the preceding line, "urge them against him in the counterfeit woman's robe, a deceitful spy of the Mænads in his own opinion, but really mad himself.” And in the same play (995),

τὸν ἄθεον, ἄνομον, ἄδικον,

Εχίονος γόνον γηγενῆ

must be rendered "the godless, lawless, unrighteous one, namely, Echion's earth-born son.'

(6) The participle at the end causes the greatest difficulty, and can hardly be explained without supposing that the noun which precedes the participle is not only an apposition, but affects, by a sort of attraction, the gender of the article. The following passages will show that this must be the case ; Thucyd. Ι. 11 : δηλοῦται τοῖς ἔργοις ὑποδεέστερα ὄντα τῆς φήμης καὶ τοῦ νῦν περὶ αὐτῶν διὰ τοὺς ποιητὰς λόγου κατεσχηκότος, “they are proved by the facts to fall short of the tradition, and of that which is now established as the story about them, owing to the poets." Id. 1. 96, § 2: ἦν δ ̓ ὁ πρῶτος φόρος ταχθεὶς τετρακόσια τάλαντα καὶ ἑξήκοντα, "that which was first fixed as the tribute was 460 talents." Id. III. 56, § 1 : αὐτοὺς ἐτιμωρησάμεθα κατὰ τὸν πᾶσι νόμον καθ εστώτα, “we have taken vengeance on them according to that which is established as the law by all men." Id. v. 11, § 1: TÒV Βρασίδαν οἱ ξύμμαχοι ἔθαψαν ἐν τῇ πόλει πρὸ τῆς νῦν ἀγορᾶς οὔσης, "the allies buried Brasidas in the city before what now serves as the forum.” Soph. Philoct. 1316:

ἀνθρώποισι τὰς μὲν ἐκ θεῶν

τύχας δοθείσας ἔστ ̓ ἀναγκαῖον φέρειν,

men must needs bear what is given to them as dispensations from the gods. Plat. Sophist. p. 231 Β: ἐν τῷ νῦν λόγῳ παραφανέντι, "in that which has now shown itself as our definition." In all these cases it will be seen that the participle really bears the stress of the sentence, and that the noun is an apposition or expla